Faith and goodness: A reply to Hocutt
Publication
, Journal Article
Staddon, JER
Published in: Behavior and Philosophy
December 1, 2009
Professor Hocutt and I agree that David Hume first pointed out that "ought"-what should be done-cannot be derived from "is"-what is the case. Hocutt goes on to claim that "ought," in fact, derives from factual observation of "what we care about," which amounts to saying "you should do what you want to do." This seems to me unsatisfactory as moral philosophy. © 2009 Cambridge Center for Behavioral Studies.
Duke Scholars
Published In
Behavior and Philosophy
ISSN
1053-8348
Publication Date
December 1, 2009
Volume
37
Start / End Page
181 / 185
Related Subject Headings
- Behavioral Science & Comparative Psychology
- 5003 Philosophy
- 2203 Philosophy
- 1702 Cognitive Sciences
- 1701 Psychology
Citation
APA
Chicago
ICMJE
MLA
NLM
Staddon, J. E. R. (2009). Faith and goodness: A reply to Hocutt. Behavior and Philosophy, 37, 181–185.
Staddon, J. E. R. “Faith and goodness: A reply to Hocutt.” Behavior and Philosophy 37 (December 1, 2009): 181–85.
Staddon JER. Faith and goodness: A reply to Hocutt. Behavior and Philosophy. 2009 Dec 1;37:181–5.
Staddon, J. E. R. “Faith and goodness: A reply to Hocutt.” Behavior and Philosophy, vol. 37, Dec. 2009, pp. 181–85.
Staddon JER. Faith and goodness: A reply to Hocutt. Behavior and Philosophy. 2009 Dec 1;37:181–185.
Published In
Behavior and Philosophy
ISSN
1053-8348
Publication Date
December 1, 2009
Volume
37
Start / End Page
181 / 185
Related Subject Headings
- Behavioral Science & Comparative Psychology
- 5003 Philosophy
- 2203 Philosophy
- 1702 Cognitive Sciences
- 1701 Psychology